Johnson v. Harder’s Empirical Analysis
512 F.2d 1188 · 1975
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently August 2007
12 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Philpott v. Essex County Welfare Board · 383 F. Supp. 174 - Johnson v. Harder
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We agree with Judge Blumenfeld that the Connecticut regulations conflict with the federal scheme for providing OASDI benefits. The federal statutes and regulations, taken in conjunction with Philpott v. Essex County Welfare Board, 409 U.S. 413 , 93 S.Ct. 590 , 34 L.Ed.2d 608 (1973), evidence a clear intention that OASDI funds be used for the beneficiary’s needs, as he or his representative payee may best determine. It would subvert this scheme to permit a state to automatically treat such benefits as available for the needs of a parent or of other children.... Accordingly, we affirm on Judge Blumenfeld’s opinion below.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[f]or the reasons stated by Chief Judge Kaufman in open court, we affirm on Judge Blumenfeld's opinion below.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.